Why did Missouri reject Richard von Glahn's 2026-R003 referendum petition on House Bill 1?

Plain-English summary

Missouri Attorney General Catherine L. Hanaway rejected Richard von Glahn's version 3 referendum petition 2026-R003 as insufficient in form. The petition sought a referendum on House Bill No. 1 from the 103rd General Assembly's Second Extraordinary Session.

The problem was timing. Missouri's referendum provisions applied to a "law" passed by the General Assembly. As of September 25, 2025, House Bill No. 1 had not been signed by Governor Kehoe, and the constitutional period for the governor to return the bill had not expired. Under Article III, Section 31, the bill therefore had not yet become law.

Because the petition did not target an existing law, it failed the form requirements in § 116.030, § 116.050, and Article III, Section 50. The Attorney General did not review whether the petition had other defects. Under § 116.332.4, the final approval or rejection decision remained with the Secretary of State.

What this means for you

Referendum proponents

Opinion 304-2025 treated a referendum petition filed before the target bill became law as defective in form. The opinion did not reach any additional possible deficiencies.

Missouri election officials

The Attorney General recommended rejection because the petition did not identify a qualifying law. The Secretary of State retained the final decision under § 116.332.4.

Legislators and legislative researchers

The opinion applied Article III, Section 31's rule for when a bill becomes law to the referendum-form requirements in Article III, Section 50 and the cited statutes.

Common questions

Q: Why was House Bill No. 1 not yet a law?
A: The opinion said Governor Kehoe had not signed it and the constitutional time for returning it had not expired.

Q: Can a Missouri referendum petition target a bill before it becomes law?
A: Not under this opinion's reading of the cited provisions. The petition form had to seek a referendum on a law passed by the state.

Q: Did the Attorney General find every possible defect in the petition?
A: No. After rejecting it for the stated timing defect, the opinion expressly declined to determine whether additional deficiencies existed.

Q: Who made the final decision on the petition form?
A: The Secretary of State retained final authority under § 116.332.4.

Background and statutory framework

The Secretary of State requested review on September 14, 2025 of a referendum submitted by Richard von Glahn on September 12. The sample sheet sought signatures for a referendum on House Bill No. 1.

Under § 116.030, a referendum petition had to concern a law passed by the General Assembly. Under § 116.050, the form had to conform to Article III, Section 50, which allowed referendum petitions on laws. Article III, Section 31 governed when an enacted bill became law.

Citations and references

• § 116.030, RSMo
• § 116.050, RSMo
• § 116.332.4, RSMo
• Article III, Sections 31 and 50 of the Missouri Constitution

Source

• Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/304-2025.pdf

Original opinion text

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
CATHERINE L. HANAWAY

September 25, 2025

OPINION LETTER NO. 304-2025

The Honorable Denny Hoskins, CPA
Missouri Secretary of State
James C. Kirkpatrick State Information Center
600 West Main Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101

Dear Secretary Hoskins:

This opinion letter responds to your request dated September 14, 2025 for our review under § 116.332, RSMo, of the sufficiency as to form of a referendum submitted on September 12, 2025 by Richard von Glahn, version 3 (2026-R003).

We conclude that the petition must be rejected as insufficient as to form, because the petition is not in the form prescribed by § 116.030, RSMo. Among the requirements to form contained in § 116.030, RSMo, is the requirement that the referendum petition be submitted "on any law" passed by the General Assembly. This requirement is reiterated in § 116.050, which provides, among other things, that the form of referendum petitions must "conform to the provisions of . . . Article III, Section 50 of the Constitution." Article III, Section 50 allows only for either initiative petitions or referendum petitions on "laws" passed by the State of Missouri.

The referendum petition sample sheet purports to collect signatures for a referendum on House Bill No. 1 of the 103rd General Assembly, 2nd Extraordinary Session ("HB 1"). Article III, Section 31 of the Missouri Constitution provides, however, that a bill passed by the Missouri House of Representatives and Senate does not become "a law" until it is either "approved by the governor" or until the bill is not "returned by the governor within the time limits prescribed by this section." HB 1 has not been signed by Governor Kehoe. Nor has time to return HB 1 expired. Article III, Section 31 makes clear that, because neither of these events have occurred, HB 1 is not currently a "law" under the Constitution and laws of Missouri. Consequently, the submitted referendum petition does not comply with the requirement to form that it refer to a "law" that the petition is seeking a referendum on, and it must therefore be rejected as insufficient to form.

Because of our rejection of the form of the petition for the reasons stated above, we have not reviewed the petition to determine whether additional deficiencies exist. Pursuant to § 116.332.4, RSMo, the Secretary of State is authorized to review this opinion and "make a final decision as to the approval or rejection of the form of the petition."

Very truly yours,

CATHERINE L. HANAWAY
Attorney General

OP-2025-324

Supreme Court Building, 207 W. High Street, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102 | Phone: (573) 751-3321 | www.ago.mo.gov